Yesterday evening, Facebook hurriedly launched a Persian (Farsi) version of the site for users in Iran. Following the past week’s events surrounding the Iranian elections and subsequent protests, Facebook felt that there was an immediate need to provide a Farsi version of the social network as an act of solidarity with the citizens of that country.
But this recent move may be in violation of Facebook’s own terms of service. Clause 4.3 of Facebook’s terms of service states, “You will not use Facebook if you are located in a country embargoed by the U.S., or are on the U.S. Treasury Department’s list of Specially Designated Nationals.”
A spokesman for the Bureau of Industry and Security, a division of the U.S. Department of Commerce, confirmed to us that there are currently five countries that the U.S. has imposed embargoes against: Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria, and Sudan. This was also confirmed by the U.S. Department of State.
Many of these embargoed countries seem to have Facebook users in their respective countries. We also heard anecdotally from someone who lives in Cuba that Facebook can be used in there as well, although the U.S. has historically implemented strict embargoes against Cuba.
Facebook doesn’t specify what exactly it means by “embargoes” (trade embargo or arms embargo, or both) or how strictly this rule is followed. As Facebook’s popularity grows internationally, perhaps the social network should take another look at its terms of service. Other Web companies such as AOL, Microsoft, and Google are reportedly banning users in embargoed countries from using instant messaging and other software. Twitter’s and MySpace’s terms of service make no similar mention to restricting users from embargoed countries.
But Facebook may have a way out. It can apply for a a special export license if it can argue that its service promotes “independent activity intended to strengthen civil society,” which is a rule that is used with Cuba, according to Department of Commerce guidelines.
We’ve contacted Facebook for a comment. We will update as soon as we hear back.
Here’s the excerpt from Facebook’s Terms of Service:
UPDATE: Facebook has issued the following response:
To be incompliance with US law, we need to prohibit commercial activities from embargoed countries. As events in Iran have demonstrated, we have allowed, and plan to continue to allow, users to set up accounts from those countries and communicate, as long as they are not engaging in commercial activities on the site.
This section you are referring to was addressed in our response to user comments on the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. They are very common terms, though they are worded differently by different companies…Our terms have caused some confusion so we may also propose revising this section in the future to be more clear.
Photo Credit: Flickr/Misterarasmus
they could just claim that there might be Farsi speakers living outside of Iran that might want to use Facebook, no?
yeah, because all they did was release it in another language
Another silly article with a Sensational Title (Crunchy Title)
Facebook cannot violate its terms because the TOS contract speaks about the users and in any way, it’s the user who would be breaking the terms here.
makes me wonder you took the time to upload a screenshot, to prove what?
fb can never go wrong!
Give a voice to the voiceless. Freedom is always enjoyed by all. {seesmic_video:{”url_thumbnail”:{”value”:”http://t.seesmic.com/thumbnail/WVXUraGDm5_th1.jpg”}”title”:{”value”:”Give a voice to the voiceless. Freedom is always enjoyed by all. ”}”videoUri”:{”value”:”http://www.seesmic.com/video/oGtq8nA6P5″}}}
facebook doesn’t care about iran and they are not trying to change the world, they are only trying to compete with twitter.
Damn good point. Twitter could take it all over as the live voice of the world and face book is just a better designed myspace with advanced privileges and no backgrounds or sounds “yet”.
the one “positive” thing facebook has got right in a loooong time.
Nice article.
Good to see techcrunch/Leena doing some old fashioned journalistiky (that’s right I made the word up) work.
journalisticiky? except they got it wrong when they assumed no one outside iran speaks Farsi…
Uh, that’s not journalism at all – this is an incredibly ignorant article. Releasing a website in a language spoken by people in an embargoed country doesn’t violate any laws.
The TOS states that not using Facebook from an embargoed country is an obligation on the USER, not the WEBSITE. If anything, the only violation that’s occurred is that Iranians have been using Facebook.
Geez, learn some facts about how all this stuff works before you write these mind-numbingly ignorant posts.
Actually, if Leena would dig a little deeper, there probably is a legitimate TOS violation here. We already know that Facebook has periodically violated its TOS by converting “friends” (engaged in non-commercial relationships) into “fans” (which can include commercial relationships):
http://tinyurl.com/ca6zen
Therefore, if there are Iranians that are fans of a for-profit entitiy on the site, then Facebook is breaking the embargo. I really wish TechCrunch would up the quality of its articles. There is so much going on out there that is shady, but it requires telling a story that might have to be a little longer than a single post.
Oops…it appears their own TOS may need to be amended a bit.
It would seem as though we are all violating 4.6 when we input our username and password into a third party social networking application like ping.fm, tweetdeck, etc. That may need to be reviewed, or perhaps there was never an intent to let us manage our FB accounts through third party applications.
Lena,
I wrote about this back in April (http://www.allf...ok-blocks-iran/) and Facebook provided the following statement:
“To be incompliance with US law, we need to prohibit commercial activities from embargoed countries. We have allowed, and plan to continue to allow, users to set up accounts from those countries and communicate, as long as they are not engaging in commercial activities on the site.”
I was talk to him yesterday the email we get that is miss understand he walk around the mall every morning we are start the construction at noon time every day that why he not see us working hard at this job try to get it done we start late because we don’t want to see the contractor union they are working next door to us
Agreed with the comment, that Farsi speakers exist outside of Iran. In fact I know at least ONE in San Francisco(!)
You may want to edit your copy to reflect accurate information.
I think it should be OK for facebook to provide a Persian(farsi) version for it’s Iranian users in US.
Nonsense. Farsi is a major language in at least six countries in the Middle East. If Australia were embargoed, would that make the United States and England off limits too because English is spoken in those countries?
Don’t bring logic into TC discussions.
Haha. Awesome reply. If I could vote, +1 on you Jason.
exactly, I’ts friday bash facebook day.
Awesom facebook.!
Interesting story. Just goes to show that web-based services like Facebook really function in a supranational space, and individual states typically have little ability to unilaterally control them.
From the perspective of a business this gets more complex (of course Facebook is incorporated in California and the corporation is subject to US law), but the network itself is pretty free to flout national systems.
Who really cares if they violate their own TOS? Besides you, I mean. It’s their website for crying out loud.
I’m sure there’s something useful you could do.
While Farsi is spoken elsewhere, it’s hard to deny Facebook’s intent. As Nick stated, though, it’s not a problem.
What is the big deal? Everyone has flaws… It is not like TC is perfect.. truth is this is a flaw you should be celebrating.. it is information, the flow of information, the sharing of ideas that will liberate and change these countries. We know war rarely works. Well some of us do. The internet is a very powerful tool in that it gives people exposure.. just look at hate.. most hate is taught because people are only exposed to controlled information. The only way that hate changes if people are able to see the things they have been taught are not true. It is why the internet is so powerful. This is a good thing.. it should be celebrated.
With the move Facebook gave voice to the people that already suffer by its countries regime’s impositions.
The U.S. embargo makes its peoples lifes even more difficult.
The embargo is a “trade embargo” banning US citizens and companies from doing business with these black listed countries.
So, if Facebook wants to provide a tool for Iranians to discus and organize, maybe not showing advertisements to Farsi speaking people is enough to stay on the right side of the law. Providing a free service isn’t considered commerce.
50% of all people that speak Farsi actually live outside Iran. So much for research…
True… but the rush to Farsi was clearly a move intended to help communications in Iran…
Of course it was, nobody questions that. The author is just trying to find a story where none is.
wait wait– process blogging?
stream of consciousness blogging
@Dante I think that’s right. Google suddenly released their farsi-english translator and on the same night facebook went farsi.
There hasn’t been a day this week, that NPR has not mentioned twitter and iran in the same sentence…
The Facebook faux pas can be simplified in 2 words: Twitter Envy. You think they would adhere to their TOS at the risk of getting overshadowed by Twitter (again)? Please. Either way, it helps the Iranian people, and the idea of democracy, so I’m all for it… regardless of what idiotic rule it breaks.
The sad thing is that it took me literally one minute to find out that information. The author didn’t even have that much time for a quick lookup?
Solidarity my sweet pehookies. Facebook ignored Farsi for years. Suddenly it’s a business opportunity for a new market for them. Plain and simple.
It’s not like the Iranians were incapable of organizing before Facebook came in to save the day.
think it this way, they made it possible for the persian people outside of iran. that’s possible and not againt their term of service.
I don’t get it, it’s just a different language offered. Spanish version is around for a while, despite Cuba being on the mentioned list of countries. It’s not that this version would only work for people in Iran. A couple of friends of mine speak Farsi, living in Germany and the UK.
As an Iranian, I am really glad about the news! I hope other major web 2.0 sites follow facebook!
Here is the comment from Facebook I sent to Leena at 10:50am PDT. I’m not sure why it didn’t make it into the story or why it hasn’t been updated, but here you go (thanks speaking up, Nick!):
To be in compliance with US law, we need to prohibit commercial activities from embargoed countries. As events in Iran have demonstrated, we have allowed, and plan to continue to allow, users to set up accounts from those countries and communicate, as long as they are not engaging in commercial activities on the site.
This section you are referring to was addressed in our response to user comments on the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. They are very common terms, though they are worded differently by different companies. Our wording has caused some confusion so we may also propose revising this section in the future to be more clear.
Also, as other comments have noted, Persian is spoken in many other countries, including Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan and by Iranians living in other countries around the world.
So that means that they just can’t use facebook ads, but can create profiles….
This post makes no sense. I know Persians who speak English and live in Iran. How did they violate their own TOS by launching a Farsi version?
Also, why would you want to bring attention to this when social media sites have been so helpful in allowing everyone to empathize with the situation in Iran?
Umm…Where in their terms of service does it say they can only have certain languages?
Languages do not equal contries.
Also the TOS says “You will not use Facebook if …” – unless the FB employees are located inside any of the embargoed (and last I checked we hadn’t embargoed California yet), then they didn’t violate anything.
Is Facebook suffering from an Immersion in Aversion to its Persian Version ?
I don’t think that it is such a big deal, I mean Facebook should be open to just about everyone.
I agree
Facebook’s terms of service are so poorly written that I’m surprised it’s taken them this long to do something so obviously in violation of their own policies. Hopefully they will learn their lesson and higher some competant lawyers to help fix their ToS up to some sort of standard.
It’s obvious FB made these changes in light of recent events. Twitter is all the buzz no how it’s changing the world and spreading democracy. In contrast it looks like FB TOS is there to prevent even Iranian from using it from Iran. Might have been better if FB had changed their TOS in parallel
that clause in the TOS is just as good as “click here if you are over 18″ it’s pointless.
Leena Rao is in her nationalistic mood maybe?
Only the complete jerks quote this list. No matter how it happened it is silly as the republicans themself.
“In Its Rush To Offer A Persian Version, Did Facebook Violate Its Terms Of Service?”
Short answer: No.
Long answer: No.
You know than Iran’s 7th major city ( in case of population ) is L.A. with more than a million Iranian ?!!!! they speak persian too, and living in states!
Alternatively Twitter is being used more often for organizing massive demonstrations, recently twitter being used by Moldova’s high-tech teens for such demonstrations.
Mega-yawn.
As an Iranian I have to say that most of Internet users in Iran have enough knowledge of at least reading and understanding English. And of course Persian speakers outside Iran are fluent with English. So, I believe, Persian Interface is more a competitive strategy than a direct help to Persian users. Google translator can help non-Persian people to understand Persian content than help Persian people to understand English. Although this service has many weaknesses in translating from Persian to English.
But I am proud that recent events in Iran caused tendency of such giants. I believe that this one week of issues was enough for people around the world to hear our voice. Thx TC for reflection.
Word to Iran. Block Facebook and Twitter once and for all. They are hypocrites. They will quickly shut down an account for Bull Shit, but quick to contribute in breaking U.S embargo laws and also the laws of those countries in aiding and abetting crime and violence.
Who knows, maybe a fatwa will be issued against them both. What say you?
You should add ‘Again’ , The real title should be :
“In Its Rush To Offer A Persian Version, Did Facebook Violate Its Terms Of Service AGAIN?”
I’m sick with all facebook violations issues !
Am I the only one who is concerned that *everyone* is getting into the habit of conflating TOS with actual law.
Here’s a hint: violating TOS is (should be) a purely contractual matter between the service provider and its users.
Violating laws, on the other hand, is between you and the police/prosecutor.
A few years ago no one paid much attention to terms of use agreements. Yeah, the big companies all had them, and many smaller companies did as well, but they were simply ignored. No more.
As privacy and security policies and processes become critically important to maintaining a company’s reputation, their terms of use and privacy policy will undergo an increasing level of scrutiny. Courts are also starting to disfavor a site’s policy of making unilateral modifications to these agreements and subsequently providing notice via a posting. Why? Because there was no acceptance to the new agreement by affirmatively clicking “I Agree.”
LOL, Do as I say, not as I do comes to mind here!
RT
http://www.anon-tools.tk
It seems that the world overall has realized that there is a need for people to have some sort of megaphone that allows them the freedom to speak out beyond their own borders, particularly in a country wherein the press (and, allegedly, the elections) are regulated. There are a lot of people in Iran trying to get their message heard – and if Facebook can facilitate this, and if Facebook’s mission is to connect people, so much the better. Timely and reactionary, yes; leeching, no.
Does FB have Twitter envy? Maybe. But with or without Twitter, they should have made this move. Whether or not it helps FB is irrelevant – this was the right thing to do.
Tossing out all the foreign journalists is something a government can do, but the power of the Internet makes a government-mandated blanket vox populi silencing that much harder. It’s clear that people will use whatever canvas or megaphone they have to make themselves heard; in my world, that’s T-shirts. (More detail on this specific phenomenon at blog dot cafepress dot com.)
So… no, I don’t think “leeching” is fair here. Just one of those perfect axis points where a company realized that their platform is powerful and incredibly relevant to a real-life world situation.
Please stop spamming threads.
Good catch BBFan that John White guy is just spaming.